§ Q3. Mr. McCrindleasked the Prime Minister if he will list his public engagements for 7th July.
§ The Prime MinisterThis morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be holding further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.
§ Mr. McCrindleWhen reading the speeches of trade union leaders, did the Prime Minister notice the very interesting one by Mr. Joe Gormley, in which he said that if the Labour movement was ever afraid of a General Election he did not know what it was in the political business for? Is the Prime Minister afraid of a General Election now? If so, what is he in the political business for?
§ The Prime MinisterOn the whole, I am in the political business in order to ensure that the Labour movement gets a full opportunity of carrying out its principles and its programme. It is a five-year programme, and that is what I hope to do.
§ Mr. MaddenCan my right hon. Friend get someone to read the speeches of the Leader of the Opposition in order to discover whether the official Opposition believe in a voluntary incomes policy, a statutory incomes policy, or no incomes policy at all?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is the view of the right hon. Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph) that there should be absolutely no incomes policy, but some 1422 of his hon. Friends seem to hold the view that there should be a statutory policy. We do not hold either view. [Interruption.] I am not discriminating. We hold neither view. The experience of the Opposition and our history since 1945 show that a statutory policy will not command consent and that it will only bring the law into disrepute. One can proceed in this country only on the basis of persuasion and acquiescence with regard to the policies that are put forward. It is a very great exercise in carrying people with us.
§ Mr. TebbitWhen the Prime Minister is going through his diary of engagements, will he refer back to his diary for January of this year and look again at his New Year's message to the Labour movement, in which he said that the social contract between the Goverenment and the trade union movement was intact and sound? Is that still his view?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. It is not. I do not think that it is intact.
§ Mr. PrenticeThe Prime Minister has told us several times what the Cabinet rejects in terms of pay policy. Can he say whether the Cabinet this morning expressed determination to stand by its own view of the guidelines of phase 3, with or without trade union agreement? Can my right hon. Friend also say that the Government will stick to those limits rigidly in the public sector and stand by any private employer who tries to stick to the same limits in the private sector?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not know whether my right hon. Friend was here when the Chancellor of the Exchequer was replying to Questions.
§ Mr. PrenticeYes.
§ The Prime MinisterMy right hon. Friend dealt with these matters perfectly adequately, and there is no need for me to add to what he said—[Interruption.] However, as the Opposition obviously like to hear me repeating what has been said already, I shall repeat it. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be meeting trade union leaders next week. In the light of that, the Cabinet will bring forward to this House a paper which will set out our views on the way in which incomes should be dealt with during the next 12 months, and I hope 1423 that it will be debated in the House before we rise for the Summer Recess.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Fairbairn.
§ Mr. Fairbairn rose—[Interruption]—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Popularity is one thing, but whom I call is another.
§ Mr. FairbairnWhen the Prime Minister addressed the nation in his philosophical and avuncular way at the weekend and told us that all his policies— [Hon. Members: "Reading"]—and told us that all his policies—[Hon. Members: "Reading"]—would help to loosen the steel band from the chests of the British people—[Hon. Members: "Reading "]—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Right hon. and hon. Members are only provoking the hon. and learned Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Mr. Fairbairn). Will the hon. and learned Gentleman be kind enough to come to his supplementary question?
§ Mr. FairbairnAs an unprovocative person, I am obliged to you, Mr. Speaker, for your protection. The right hon. Gentleman said that his policies would help to loosen the steel band from the chests of the British people. Are we entitled to assume that that means that he intends to cut the Lib-Lab pact?
§ The Prime MinisterI am not at all sure that the denouement was worthy of the build-up, but I realise that the hon. and learned Gentleman was in some difficulty. If he refers to my speech, assuming that he is allowed to later, he will see that my point was that it was the fact that the balance of payments will be moving into surplus over a period, thanks largely to North Sea oil, which would loosen one of the constraints. I went on to say—and I think that this cannot be challenged—that, with that constraint loosened, which has held us back for many years, if we can get on top of some of the other serious difficulties—for example, a reasonable control of incomes rises, an expansion of the economy, prices and the rest of it—this country will have an opportunity that it has not had for 30 years. I hope that we in the Labour movement will be able to take advantage of it.